Allowed¶8

Mohammad Aajad@Aazad v. the State (Govt., N.C.T. of Delhi)

Delhi HC6 Aug 2025BAIL APPLN./2759/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail under S.20 NDPS Act granted despite awaited FSL report; definition of ganja under S.2(iii)(b) NDPS Act - flowering/fruiting tops of cannabis, seeds and leaves excluded when unaccompanied by tops; seizure memo showing only dried leaves and seeds; failure of IO to carry/use field testing kit before dispatch to FSL; S.50 NDPS notice refused by accused; DD No.48A; FIR No. 16/2025 PS Hazrat Nizamuddin Railway Station; intermediate quantity 5.2 kg; custody/incarceration since 01.03.2025; personal bond Rs.10,000/- with one surety; BAIL APPLN. 2759/2025; Girish Kathpalia J.; observations limited to bail only.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail; applicant to be released on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. ¶8

Mohammad Aajad@Aazad Vs the State (Govt., N.C.T. of Delhi) — Narcotics (NDPS) | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail; applicant to be released on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused/applicant, in custody since 01.03.2025 in FIR No. 16/2025 (offence under Section 20 NDPS Act), is entitled to regular bail notwithstanding that the seized material had been sent directly to FSL without field testing and its report was awaited. +1 more

¶2

Court's answer

Vide DD No.48A the IO was specifically informed that Ct. Mandeep had apprehended a boy carrying a bag containing ganja; the IO should have carried the field testing kit with him but did not do so, and the recovered material was sent directly to FSL without initial field testing.

¶6

Ratio / Principle

According to the seizure memo the allegedly recovered material was only dried leaves and seeds; ganja is defined in Section 2(iii)(b) NDPS Act as the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant excluding seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops, and there is nothing on record to show that the alleged material was accompanied with flowering or fruiting tops.

¶7

Key takeaways

Prima facie the Court found strength in the argument of learned counsel for the accused/applicant that the recovered material was not ganja.ratio¶7
Consequently, adjourning the bail matter awaiting the FSL report as requested by the learned prosecutor would not be appropriate.ratio¶7
If the accused/applicant deserves to be released on bail, denying him liberty for even a day awaiting the FSL report would not be appropriate; nor is it certain that FSL would report quickly in view of its overloaded dockets.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Girish Kathpalia, J.) allowed a regular bail application under Section 20 NDPS Act (FIR No. 16/2025, PS Hazrat Nizamuddin Railway Station; total alleged recovery 5.2 kg ganja, an intermediate quantity). The seizure memo recorded recovery of only dried leaves and seeds, whereas ganja under Section 2(iii)(b) NDPS Act means the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant excluding seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops, and nothing on record showed the material was accompanied with flowering or fruiting tops. The IO, though informed via DD No.48A that a bag containing ganja had been apprehended, failed to carry a field testing kit and the material went directly to FSL; the Court held that adjourning the matter awaiting the FSL report would not be appropriate, nor denying the applicant (in custody since 01.03.2025) liberty for even a day. Applicant released on personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount. All observations expressly confined to the bail application and declared to have no bearing on the trial.

¶1

$~4

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 06.08.2025

¶4

BAIL APPLN. 2759/2025 MOHAMMAD AAJAD@AAZAD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Lokesh Payla and Shripal Upadhyay, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE (GOVT., N.C.T. OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State with IO/SI Rameshwar

¶7

CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶8

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

¶9

In furtherance of last order, status report was filed. I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP for State assisted by IO/SI Rameshwar Prasad.

¶10

The accused/applicant, suffering incarceration since 01.03.2025 seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 16/2025 of PS Hazrat Nizamuddin Railway Station for offence under Section 20 of NDPS Act.

¶11

2.1 Broadly speaking, the prosecution case is as follows. On 28.02.2025 at about 10:45pm on receipt of DD No.48A at PS Hazrat Nizamuddin

¶12

BAIL APPLN. 2759/2025

¶13

Page 1 of 4 pages

¶14

GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2025.08.06 18:01:36 -07'00'

¶15

Signature Not Verified

¶16

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:0 6.08.2025 18:18:45

¶17

Railway Station, the IO/SI Rameshwar along with HC Amzad Khan reached platform no.8 at the railway station, where Constable Mandeep and Constable Bhavar Singh were already present along with the accused/applicant.

¶18

2.2 Constable Mandeep informed that when the said two constables were patrolling at platform no.8 at around 10:15pm, they observed one person carrying a black and blue backpack in suspicious circumstances. On seeing the constables the said person became nervous and started walking swiftly. Constable Mandeep called out that person but the latter attempted to flee, so with the help of the other constable and RPF personnel, that person was apprehended.

¶19

2.3 That apprehended person is the present accused/applicant. On checking the backpack carried by him, two packets wrapped in brown adhesive tape were recovered. Those packets bore cut openings from where dry leaves and seeds emitting a strong odour were visible and the appearance was similar to ganja.

¶20

2.4 The IO issued notice under Section 50 NDPS Act, in response to which the accused/applicant refused to get himself searched before a magistrate.

¶21

2.5 The recovered ganja was found to be 2.640 kg and 2.560 kg. The total recovered ganja being 5.2 kg is an intermediate quantity.

¶22

BAIL APPLN. 2759/2025

¶23

Page 2 of 4 pages

¶24

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:0 6.08.2025 18:18:45

¶27

Learned counsel for accused/applicant contends that the accused/applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the allegedly seized material is not even ganja in terms with its definition under Section 2(iii)(b) of NDPS Act. Further, it is contended that the allegedly recovered material was dispatched to FSL without first testing the same with the help of the field testing kit.

¶28

On the other hand, learned APP for State in all fairness admits that the allegedly recovered material was not tested initially with field testing kit and was directly sent to FSL. However, it is contended by learned APP that with his experience, the IO is confident that the allegedly recovered material is ganja only, so the matter be adjourned awaiting FSL report.

¶29

Having perused the investigation file, I am of the view that if the accused/applicant deserves to be released on bail, denying him liberty for even a day awaiting FSL report would not be appropriate. It is not even certain that FSL would be able to give report in a short time, in view of its overloaded dockets.

¶30

More significantly, vide DD No.48A, the IO was specifically informed that Ct. Mandeep had apprehended a boy carrying a bag containing ganja. The IO should have carried with him the field testing kit but it was not done.

¶31

Further, according to the seizure memo, the allegedly recovered

¶32

BAIL APPLN. 2759/2025

¶33

Page 3 of 4 pages

¶34

¶35

Signature Not Verified

¶36

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:0 6.08.2025 18:18:45

¶37

material was only dried leaves and seeds. The contraband ganja is defined in Section 2(iii)(b) of NDPS Act as the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant, excluding the seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops. As is obvious, there is nothing on record to show that the alleged material was accompanied with flowering or fruiting tops. That being so, prima facie , I find strength in the argument of learned counsel for the accused/applicant that the recovered material was not ganja. Consequently, adjourning the matter awaiting FSL report as requested by learned prosecutor would not be appropriate.

¶38

In view of the above discussion, the application is allowed and the accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

¶39

It is made clear that the above observations have been recorded only for the limited purposes of dealing with bail application and these observations shall have no bearing on the final outcome of trial.

¶40

Copy of this order be sent to concerned Jail Superintendent for being conveyed to the accused/applicant.

¶41

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af396 GIRISH 2c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f 80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA KATHPALIA Date: 2025.08.06 18:02:30 -07'00'

¶42

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE)

¶43

AUGUST 6, 2025/ ry

¶44

BAIL APPLN. 2759/2025

¶45

Page 4 of 4 pages

¶46

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:0 6.08.2025 18:18:45

Mohammad Aajad@Aazad v. the State (Govt., N.C.T. of Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Aajad@Aazad v. the State (Govt., N.C.T. of Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anita Vs State NCT of Delhi

Shri Vijay Kumar Arya and Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Manish@Lulu Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Bijender Singh Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Vijay @ Vijay Kumar Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

Chhote Singh Vs the State NCT of Delhi